שמות, פרק כ״א, פסוק ל״ב

When an animal fatally injures a human being, the owner is typically required to pay a financial ransom calculated according to the specific value of the victim. However, when the victim is a slave, the legal framework shifts dramatically from an individualized assessment to a rigid, fixed penalty. The primary approach among commentators is that this law applies exclusively to a Canaanite slave. A Hebrew slave, by contrast, retains the legal standing of any free Israelite. In such a case, the payment would be calculated based on his personal worth and transferred to his heirs rather than his master [רש״י, מזרחי, מלבי״ם, גור אריה, רשב״ם, שד״ל]. The liability for this fixed penalty applies specifically to an animal with a known history of violence, whose owner has already been warned about its dangerous tendencies. If an otherwise peaceful animal attacks for the very first time, the owner is exempt from this specific financial penalty [רשב״ם, העמק דבר, חזקוני, קאסוטו].

The penalty itself is strictly set at thirty silver shekels, referring to pure silver coins that were likely used in regional trade long before the Israelites minted their own currency [ברכת אשר, רלב״ג, שד״ל]. This amount is an absolute decree, entirely disconnected from the slave's actual market value. Whether the victim was a highly skilled artisan worth a thousand coins or an elderly, ailing individual worth only a single coin, the penalty remains exactly the same [רש״י, רבנו בחיי, תורה תמימה, בכור שור, ביאור יש״ר, דברי דוד].

Commentators offer several explanations for this uniform rate. From a practical standpoint, slaves frequently worked in the fields alongside livestock, increasing their exposure to such dangers. A fixed sum prevents endless legal battles between the animal's owner and the slave's master over the precise financial loss [בכור שור, חזקוני]. Historically, this amount reflected the average price of a slave in the ancient world [אבן עזרא, קאסוטו]. On a conceptual level, this sum aligns with the fixed valuation the Torah assigns to a woman in other contexts, reflecting the fact that a Canaanite slave and a woman share a similar legal status regarding their obligation to observe commandments [ספורנו, חזקוני, רש״ר הירש]. Furthermore, establishing a uniform penalty prevents the slave from being evaluated purely as a commercial asset. Appraising human life strictly by market value reduces it to mere material trade; the fixed ransom thus preserves human dignity and the divine image within the victim [רש״ר הירש].

The financial compensation is paid directly to the slave's owner. This holds true even in complex ownership situations, such as when the slave belongs to a married woman as part of her distinct property. In that scenario, the payment goes directly to the wife, who retains true ownership of the individual, rather than to her husband, who merely holds the right to benefit from the slave's labor [תורה תמימה, מלבי״ם].

Despite the unique financial arrangement, the fate of the lethal animal is identical to one that kills a free person. The animal is executed by stoning, a powerful reminder that slaves, too, are created in the image of God [קאסוטו, שטיינזלץ]. The fixed nature of the financial penalty does not diminish the severity of the loss of life, and the animal must be put to death even if it belonged to the very same master who owned the slave [תורה תמימה, מלבי״ם].